devices today. good to be with you. quote we have a lot of cash. i believe we have substantially

in excess of 400 million in cash, which is a lot for a developer. developers usually don't have cash. they have assets. not cash. we have, i believe, 400 plus and going up very substantially every month. that was donald trump less than a year ago during a closed door deposition in his new york civil fraud case, but today, he says he does not have that money. that m coing up with the $464 million bond is a quote practical impossibility. that it would require a fire sale of his assets. his legal team is making an appeal to the judge but instead of helping his case, donald trump is now lashing out on social media saying quote, engoron wants me to put up the ridiculous fine, i did nothing wrong, before i get a chance to appeal his crazed ruling. but first, any business dealing about moving into new york is crazy. james is politically corrupt and

ran on i will get trump. so, is this panic or politics? or is it a little bit of both? joining us now to nail down what exactly we know about trump's current financial state, what we expect from the judge and how the rnc might try to step in to help is garrett haake. "new york times" investigative reporter, and chairman and co-host of the weekend, michael steele. garrett, i'm going to start with you. donald trump is saying he doesn't have the money. what do we know about the efforts he's made currently to get this bond money? >> his attorneys say they've reached out to 30 different concerns. none of these folks would take his physical properties as collateral and he doesn't have the cash in his bank accounts or the trump organization's bank accounts to put up the money himself. the deadline is monday. we don't know when the judge

will rule but presumably it has to be before then. the attorneys saying they've made this good faith effort to find someone to make the bond but there's not that many people who can front the money. >> are they prepared to start selling off assets if need be? >> i have no basis by which to answer that question other than donald trump's truth social post suggesting that he would have to do so at a fire sale. not the thing you want to be off loads distressed assets. his truth social account is essentially his diary. he posts his unfiltered thoughts there. and the fact his needs for cash go beyond just this case. there's also his campaign's need for cash. there are sort of a widespread desire to get more money into the trump political and legal

system. just not there right now. >> what can you tell us about how the campaign is dealing with this? do they see this cash crunch as significant? i mean, are they, you say they're looking for more money. where are they looking? >> the campaign has been sort of surprisingly open about the fact they expect to get outspent in this election and they understand that president biden and his allies might spend a billion dollars. and that they're going to struggle to keep up with that. donald trump has long been politically by a small donor donation machine. his supporters across the country fuelling into that. trump has been more solicitous of big donors. they've been trying to lure more traditional donors in since the primary ended. we haven't seen much campaigning from trump. the event on saturday was an event posted by a pac he

attended. they're trying to guard the cash they have and try to bring in more money. the fact the other new york case got pushed off by a month sort of frees up a bunch of time in his calendar and it's one of the questions i'm trying to get an answer to how much of that time is going to be spent campaigning and how much is going to be sprent trying to -- >> he has a bunch of cameras in front of him. i want to get down to the finances of this. this was a 4,000-page motion, appeal, that the trump legal team made to the judge. they're saying they can't find this cash. have they exhausted all their resources? all their options? >> a little bit i think they've still got some moves here, but they are in trouble. i think both can be true.

i don't think there's any doubt that donald trump is facing a severe crisis right now. it looks like nobody will take this, will post this bond for him. they want cash, cash, cash, cash. we saw with the e. jean carroll bond, he had to post that. we know he posted a -- >> gave him cash. >> trump handled the bond and behind that was an account he had at charles schwab. there's affidavits from this, both from their broker who's trying to find the bond and in the senior executive at the trump organization that said they have tried and everybody wants cash and they were in negotiations with trump for this larger bond and chubb was looking potentially at taking some real estate and they said no. it's a lot of cash to have on hand and he doesn't have it. very clear about that. >> let me ask you, david, because you've done so much reporting around donald trump's finances and the real estate

side of things. why would these companies not want to take real estate as collateral? >> well, the general reason would be that it's not liquid. it's harder to collect. the other thing is there aren't a lot of properties that trump owns free and clear. even his golf courses, most of which aren't worth enough money to make a difference, there's all these member deposits. if trump's going to sell them, he has to give back the member deposits. his buildings, he only owns the commercial floors or some condos. there's not that many big assets that he could put over as collateral that a bank could sell right away. >> is this panic, suzanne, or politics? him saying i can't find this cash and i don't know i'm going to do, or all these social media posts where he's going after the

judge again, going after james, saying he doesn't have the cash and he shouldn't have to do this. shouldn't have to pay a bond on appeal. is this him trying to use this to his political advantage? >> i think there's some political advantage and i think this is just another legal maneuver. why not go to the court? you're in a crunch. he may get relief. the court may say you know, lower the bond amount. there's still some legal avenues potentially that could happen or you know, in the meantime, this also could send a bit of a flare up saying you know, people, everybody know he's looking for this and someone may come forward. it's almost hard to believe at this point that somebody who there might be a last minute person come forward. it's not a secret this is going on, but you never know. it's now very clear to the world that he can't come up with the money. >> the judge gave him no leniency whatsoever during the

trial or the case. what makes his legal team think they're going to get something like that now, especially when he's going after him on social? >> there could be an appeal after this. >> of the bond? >> no, just an appeal to another court to get some sort of relief. so that it can be stayed. he still have a few more legal maneuvers left. >> david, what do we know about hiss finances? he said last year he had 400 million plus. what do we know about the money he has today? >> about $350 million in cash. or liquid assets. the e. jean carroll verdict, that was about $91 million. so he's already pledged a huge chunk to that. he can't count that twice. the wild card is if you remember truth social, it has this weird spac arrangement where it's going to go public on wall street. the vote is on friday. if those shareholders vote to

authorize that, trump could come into more than a billion dollars worth of stock out of nowhere. he probably couldn't use it any way, but that's the wild card. if that vote goes forward, he could get an infusion of cash from shareholders. >> just to add to david's point, one thing that's important to remember at donald trump's cash position is we don't know unless we have his bank statement from this morning. about a year ago, he may have had 150 million in cash, but he has got constant draws on his cash. most of his businesses lose money and some require capital injections so i think it's just really important to remember unless you've got a bank statement from this morning, you really don't know what you're playing with here. >> it's a privately held company and it's not as transparent as others might be. michael, i've been saving you because i want to get the politics of this and what donald trump might do to raise money to pay maybe not in bond.

it's so, so, steep, but the other legal bill he's facing that garrett outlined. he's installed his hand picked people at the rnc including his daughter-in-law. she had said the rnc would be willing to pay some of these legal bills. she's walked some of this back. how might the rnc get involved? >> they'll be involved in any number of ways that the lawyers can figure out. the fact they've got wattly and laceveda in place covers the political piece and sort of the management side of that equation. now it's just a matter of given the counsel they recently installed who is all maga all the time. there's going to be at least a consistency in the effort overseen and really sort of physically represented by laura trump. donald trump will get his money if he wants it siphoned off to

some degree. tens of millions of dollars in legal fees. this, we've just been talking about what he has to pay as a result of judgments. we haven't talked about what the legal fees that are owed to you know, stave off those judgments and to further defend those judgments. so that in many respects is where you'll see some of the dollars go and that's why they've been so defensive about not paying the fees. when he gives chris a legal bill, the rnc will pay it. so that's going to require, you know, a level of due diligence by those who look at the, every 30-day fec filings of the republican national committee to see exactly where those dollars are going and who they're going to and how they're being categorized. that's important. because i can have an event at a

hotel and just list the hotel and a dollar amount. you then have to peel back the onion and see exactly what those costs were et cetera. so it's, there are a lot of ways in which they can hide those expenses. >> note to self, when it comes out, call michael steele and have him go through it line by line. >> i don't know how they hide it. >> receipts, et cetera, actually mean. let me ask you about what this is going to mean politically. he's tried to use these cases to his political advantages. tried to use them as impromptu or unofficial rallies talking to reporters outside the courthouse. he's not due in court for a little while. there's a little bit of a lull in time as garrett was saying and there's not any indication he's got a full campaign schedule. these rallies are really expensive and garrett mentioned the small donors are potentially going to be a problem for donald trump.

how does he conduct the business of campaigning if he doesn't have a lot of cash and he's not going to court that much? >> i think you see that already with the truth social platform. when you're looking at this calendar here, where in here does donald trump raise money? how does he do it? where within these events does donald trump have events himself. the reality is yeah, i can go out and keep beating that drum about the prosecutor and the judges, right? and that will generate a certain level of cash. i can tell you the number of you know, times a day i get a text from donald trump's campaign, you know, begging for cash. the small dollar donor will be an initial play and he will generate some real money from that. i don't think people should sort of slough that off and think there's no cash available to him or his campaign in that space.

you have small dollar donors out there hosting go fund me accounts for his legal bills, for example, so there will be a number of ways in which he can leverage that but at the end of the day, it boils down to can you put up the band and how is that money backed when you do. and that is a problem because he has to go to a bank. he's got to go to a surety to get that kind of cash. you're not raising 100 million let alone $400 million from a small dollar donor. >> i'm looking through my e-mail and if i type make america great or maga, i'm looking at campaign solicitations every day, multiple times a day. if i type in donald j. trump, another set every day. multiple times a day. and there are a few other accounts. yeah, you do get a lot of them. you get a lot of them from everybody. the democrats send a ton as well. michael, david, suzanne, thank

you very much for trying to pull back the curtain on donald trump's finances. it's a difficult thing but you guys do a great job of doing it. still ahead, what the supreme court just did that's having an immediate impact on mie dwrant in texas. plus, what a new report says is happening right now in louisiana. and what does donald trump get out of insulting american jews? we're back in 60 seconds. n jews we're back in 60 seconds

the supreme court just ruled texas can enforce is controversial immigration law, allowing local law enforcement to arrest and charge migrants. joining us now is mark josepher stern. thanks for being with us. explain this ruling to me. >> so this ruling allows texas to immediately enforce an

unprecedented law that does allow state authorities to interfere with federal immigration enforcement. as you said, it allows state agents to arrest, to prosecute, to detain migrants. it prevents many migrants from seeking asylum as is their statutory right. it actually nullifies some federal laws that require the federal government to take the lead in enforcement at the border. the supreme court by a 6-3 vote has now let that law take effect but with a big footnote which is that justices amy coney barrett and brett kavanaugh say basically we're not rendering a financial decision here. all we're saying is that the fifth circuit has successfully shielded its decision from review for now. we're letting them do this kind of games man ship to prevent us from stopping it. we won't let the fifth circuit keep playing this game forever, but for now, we're going to

exercise our discretion. >> from sotomayor and jackson, they say today the court invites further chaos and crisis and the court gives a green light to a law that will up end power so chaos concluded it is likely unconstitutional. explain it going back to the fifth circuit and we were talking about it yesterday. you say this is a very, very conservative court. >> absolutely. and what the fifth circuit has begun doing is attempting to insulate its decisions and orders from supreme court review by putting a magic word on them. calling them administrative stays. that's what happened here. a trial judge blocked this law. the fifth circuit stepped in and issued what it called an administrative stay. those are supposed to be very, very short periods of time when the court can sort of get its act together, hear motions from parties, and issue a decision

very quickly. it's not supposed to be a long-term thing. but what the fifth circuit has done here is slapped an administrative stay that is indefinite, that could go on for weeks or months, refuse to say when it would take further action and use that to insulate the decision and that worked. that's one of the things that sotomayor is so upset about. she's basically saying you have let the fifth circuit turn itself into a miniature supreme court. that's what justice barrett and kavanaugh are concerned about, but they say we don't think the fifth circuit has crossed the line yet. we see it's a problem but we're not going to step in in this case. we'll give them another shot then maybe next time around, we'll take real action. >> thank you very much. and coming up, what jewish democrats are saying today after donald trump claimed they quote hate their religion. plus, a new report raises red flags about prenatal care in louisiana. what it is explicitly warning.

don't go anywhere. explicitly wg don't go anywhere. so you can t! so many selfies. a preposterous amount of pano! that means panoramic. and as many portraits of me as your heart desires. (woman) how about none? (boy) none. (man) yea none feels right. (vo) trade-in any iphone in any condition and get a new iphone 15 pro and an ipad and apple watch se all on us. only on verizon. wanna know how i get this glow?! i get ready with new olay indulgent moisture body wash. it smells amazing and gives my skin over the top moisture! from dull to visibly glowing in 14 days! ♪♪ see the difference with olay. everywhere but the seat. the seat is leather. alan, we get it. you love your bike. we do, too. that's why we're america's number-one motorcycle insurer. but do you have to wedge it into everything? what? i don't do that. this reminds me of my bike. the wolf was about the size of my new motorcycle. have you seen it, by the way? happy birthday, grandma!

really? look how the brushstrokes follow the line of the gas tank. -hey! -hey! brought my plus-one. jamie? (bridget) with thyroid eye disease i hid from the camera. and i wanted to hide from the world. for years, i thought my t.e.d. was beyond help... but then i asked my doctor about tepezza. (vo) tepezza is the only medicine that treats t.e.d. at the source

not just the symptoms. in a clinical study more than 8 out of 10 patients taking tepezza had less eye bulging. tepezza is an infusion and may cause infusion reactions. tell your doctor right away if you experience high blood pressure, fast heartbeat, shortness of breath or muscle pain. before treatment, tell your doctor if you have diabetes, ibd, or are pregnant, or planning to become pregnant. tepezza may raise blood sugar and may worsen ibd. tepezza may cause severe hearing problems which may be permanent. (bridget) now, i'm ready to be seen again. (vo) visit mytepezza.com to find a ted eye specialist and to see bridget's before and after photos. it's hard to explain what this feels like. ♪♪ moving piles of earth. towing up to 4,000 lbs. cutting millions of blades of grass. nothing compares to experiencing it for yourself. you just have to get in the seat.

it can now be considered even more dangerous to be pregnant in the state of louisiana. a new in depth report by advocacy groups interviewed dozens of doctors and patients in the state and found louisiana's ban on decision has significantly changed care for the worse. >> the report found delays in creting miscarriages and patients forced to wait and suffer. an ob in baton rouge saw this herself when a patient came to the er while miscarrying. >> she was in pain, bleeding. >> the patient wanted a procedure to reprove the pregnancy tissue. >> i know this pregnancy is not going to make it anywhere near survival. and i was stopped from taking

her to the operating room. >> doctor after doctor described having to deny or seriously delay care. in some cases, refusing to even see pregnant patients before 12 weeks. and giving c-sections to women in order to quote, preserve the appearance of not doing an abortion. joining us now, medical director with positions of human rights and professor at the university of michigan, michelle heissler. she is one of the report's authors. it's really great to have you. explain the takeaway from this report. >> yes. we did the investigation to really hear from clinicians and parents what their experiences were since louisiana introduced really strict abortion bans. the only exceptions are to preserve the life of the mother, the pregnant patient, and in cases where the fetus is deemed

medically futile. and we really wanted to hear from clinicians, from patients what their experiences had been. as you said, we did hear stories of denial of care. delay of care. for a clinician, how do you determine that it's at the point that the pregnant patient's life is at risk? so we heard really harrowing stories of people feeling they had to wait until you know, even the blood pressure was a little bit lower. you have to wait until they're clearly septic before you can offer to terminate the pregnancy. delays, you know, ectopic pregnancies are allowed but making absolutely sure it's an ectopic pregnancy. making absolutely sure it's a miscarriage. so subjecting patients to a lot of pain and suffering as well as in a number of cases we heard

about real risk of death. >> so i've heard about the delay to the point of sepsis, making sure the miscarriage is happening. what i found new about this report that i hadn't heard before was that some women were getting c-sections because their babies were not viable. can you explain that component of this? i've had two. getting a c-section is horrible and i don't think anybody generally chooses that for themselves or if they do, i'm not sure why they would. it's pretty horrible pain. what's going on with c-sections? >> yeah. i will say that that, i agree with you. that was not a finding that i had even thought about as being a possibility. and what we heard clinicians told us of cases and one of the cases we do include in the report. in this one case, an emergency

medicine physician was taking care of a patient who had what's calling a previable, pre-term premature rupture of membranes at 20 weeks. that's always not a viable pregnancy. the membranes have ruptured, you have to remove the fetus. >> this is when your water breaks. >> yeah, at 20 weeks, that's not going to be a viable pregnancy. the emergency medicine physician called the ob-gyn and the ob-gyn took the patient for a se assarian section and the physician felt it was because the ob didn't want there to be any question that she had performed an illegal abortion. so as you've said, subjecting the patient to, i think i also want to add that you know, there always are cases where it's the woman's decision to deliver, but you always have to give that choice. do you want to deliver or do you

want to have what's called a dilation and evacuation, which is not invasive. it's not a major abdominal surgery. i think it was very upsetting to this physician that the patient was given no choice. that's antithet cal to the practice of medicine. we're trained, i'm a physician. you respect your patient's autonomy, their freedom. their ability to have a say in the decision making. we also heard from two other clinicians of cases where a patient went and was given what's called a his rot my, a c-section. we can't talk about prevalence because we were really wanting to hear the stories but they did say increasingly, there aren't physicians in louisiana that are trained and able to do dilation and evacuations and we did speak

to one of the physicians who is still doing those. some facilities are just not doing them. so again, could it be in part that you don't have people trained to do these procedures? so they have to either deliver or do a c-section or because there's so much fear, there's so much fear of being, you know, facing the severe criminal penalties. that people don't even want to have an appearance of an abortion. >> doctors are clearly very scared and there were examples of a woman being refused care until she got through the first 12 weeks of her pregnancy because that's the time when most miscarriages happen and the doctors didn't want them to be involved if there was a miscarriage. they wanted them to come when they felt it would be safer. usually if you think you're pregnant, you go to the doctor and the doctor helps you

immediately. again, it's a very delicate time. thank you so much for joining us. we're up against the clock because we have breaking news we have to get to, but i encourage everybody to read this report. it is an eye opener and scary. this is out of the supreme court as well. this time involving donald trump. the former president has just filed his immunity brief in the special counsel's election interference case. joining us now is ryan riley. this is the brief ahead of the oral arguments this happen next month. >> that's right. one of the big arguments he's making is that it would be the end of the presidency as we know it if the court doesn't recognize these broad, sweeping immunity claims the president is seeking to basically get rid of these charges in connection with his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the lead up to the attack on the capitol on january 6th. something else that jumped out when i did a read through is that they really emphasized the

importance, this is ironic coming from the trump folks, the importance of the press and congressional oversight. saying those are checks on presidential power in this case that could be used instead of this, instead of criminal charges against a president. so they're really going broad here and saying this case should be dismissed all the way, everything should be just be dropped then making a sub argument after that saying even if the court recognizes some sort of qualified immunity, laying out the argument for how exactly the court should be, the lower court, judge chutkan, should be ordered to handle that if she gets this case back in her courtroom. >> let me read a little bit from the brief. a denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future president with de facto blackmail while in office and condemn him, could be her, but they say him, to years of post office trauma at the hands of political opponents. on page 29, they call it the end of the presidency as we know it. do we know if they're going to

try to, i'm sure they're going to get asked about the argument they made in the lower court about how donald trump could do whatever he wanted. use s.e.a.l. team six to assassinate a political rival, and couldn't be prosecuted for it unless congress impeached and convicted him. >> sure, or the judges could come up with their own hypothetical. but i'm sure that's something they could press him on. where are the outer bounds of this. the argument is making if if first he is convicted by the senate. correct. impeachment clause. donald trump went through two of these and did not reach that two-thirds number you need in order to secure a conviction in the senate. this is a guy who bragged he could shoot someone in the

middle of fifth avenue and get away with it. >> thank you very much. coming up, so far, no labels has had no luck in finding a presidential ticket. but what happens if that changes? steve kornacki will tell us if president trump or president biden should be more concerned about a third party threat. first up, donald trump takes another swipe at jewish americans who vote for democrats. what's he trying to get out of that? don't go anywhere. at's he tryinf that don't go anywhere. ood is simple. it looks like food, it smells like food, it's what dogs are supposed to be eating. no living being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪

no labels is having no luck. former georgia lieutenant governor jeff duncan is the latest would be candidate to turn down a place on the quote unity ticket for the centrist group. he joins nikki haley and joe manchin among many others. still, the group is looking to get on as many state ballots as possible. alongside other third party candidates including jill stein and rfk jr. joining us now, steve kornacki. so, steve, explain to us the effects of a third party candidate. >> i guess the two words to start with are just wild card. we can all have our different theories and ideas but until a name steps forward or several names step forward and show they can get on all the necessary ballots, raise money, get attention, that sort of thing. it's tough to say, but we can take you through some of the

numbers we do have. now, we gave voters a third party option. we read them the name of no label, but can't give them candidates. there's no human being names. we're just testing an openness to a third party choice. you see here 15% opted for that when we gave them that option. trump, 41, biden, 35. when we didn't give voters that third party option, it was just trump and just biden, trump got 47. biden got 42. so trump came down six points with that third option. biden came down seven points with that third option. take a look here. the name out there for now, the biggest name out there when it comes to third party is robert f. kennedy jr. again, question marks here about what he's going to be able to do in terms of ballot access. we did test in our poll just basic attitudes towards him and overall, it's basically split. 27% said they have a positive view of him.

28%, a negative view, but there's a big division here. those who voted for trump in 2020 fairly positive when it comes to robert f kennedy jr. at least those with an opinion of him. and those who voted for biden in 2020 say they did very negative when it comes to robert f. kennedy jr. what's interesting, in other polls that test kennedy with biden and trump, you actually see he polls about equally in these polls from democrats and republicans even though on the whole, he's more popular with republicans than democrats. the smaller share of democrats saying they'll vote for kennedy is about equal for republicans saying they would, too. just in terms of what effect independents have had historically. not every year obviously produces a ground swell for independent candidates but go back eight years. high negatives for trump in 2016. high negatives for hillary clinton in 2016. gary johnson got over 20%.

jill stein got 1%. evan mcmullan got about half a percent but got quarter of the vote in utah. 2000 is the famous recent example. there's a lot of democrats that believe ralph nader's president cost him. one county in florida, florida was only 538-vote margin. palm beach county had the butterfly ballot. buchanan said he picked up several thousand votes in his view were intended for gore but because of ballot design confusion went to nader. that might have made the difference there. go back to '96. ross perot. he got over 8% but that was a blowout there. krint clinton over dole, he got close to 19%.

didn't win a state. there was a point in that campaign where it looked like he could have a shot at winning the whole thing then he had some issues and his negative ratings went up. go back to 1980 and again, carter, reagan. john anderson, a liberal republican ran as an independent. he ended up with about 6.5% in spring that year. polling put him over 20% as the campaign went on and on, voters decided i kind of like anderson. voters were initially for him said they liked him but didn't think he could win then they went to carter or reagan. that is the modern history of it. the last independent to actually get an electoral vote, george wallace. 1968. the segregationist. won five southern states. >> i love that you did this story for us today because it is so firmly up your alley, steve. i think it's so fascinating. i love that you say ballot design confusion for 2000. i think that's more commonly

known as a hanging chad. >> all sorts of confusion. >> we'll see if my generation z producer know what is a hanging chad is. norah, do you? >> i do. >> that's good. steve, thank you very much. still ahead, what to make of donald trump's latest attack on jewish americans who vote for democrats. plus, inflation is falling and unemployment is at its lowest level in more than 50 years. why don't americans give the economy higher grades then and if they don't, do they give their own personal finances higher grades? there is some confusion on this. don't go anywhere. rades? there is some confusion on t his. don't go anywhere.

i was scared when i was told age related macular degeneration could jeopardize my vision. it was hard, but taking preservision was easy. preservision has the exact clinically proven areds 2 formula recommended by the nei. i'm taking control like millions of others.

my frequent heartburn had me taking antacid after antacid all day long but with prilosec otc just one pill a day blocks heartburn for a full 24 hours. for one and done heartburn relief, prilosec otc. one pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn.

donald trump says jews who vote for democrats hate their religion. >> why do the democrats hate netanyahu? >> i think they hate israel. when you see those palestinian marches, even i'm amazed at how many people are in those marches and guys like schumer see that and to him, it's votes. i think it's votes more than anything else because he was always pro israel. he's very anti israel now. any jewish person that votes for democrats hates their religion. they hate everything about israel and they should be ashamed of themselves. >> really means a thing he said

which by the way he said before. his campaign said yes. quote, president trump is right. the democratic has turned into a full blown anti israel, antisemitic, pro terrorist cabal. franklin, first off, i read that piece and it was an amazing read. also extremely depressing. talk to me about what these comments from donald trump do to the current conversation that's being had. >> first of all, we need to understand that there is history here. that his remarks conjure. that authoritarian regimes have a history of dividing the good jews into the bad. the good ones align themselves with the leader and the state and the bad the ones who don't. that distinction gets made not just to praise the good jews, but it's done as a pretext for

discriminating against the bad jews, so when he says something like this, it occurs in the context of all this history. that's why it's antisemitic on its face but it's also just chilling knowing the ways in which those distinctions can lead to terrible things. >> talk to me about what happened after donald trump's 2016 victory in terms of antisemitism. >> right. so after october 7th, there was this incredible surge of antisemitism but i think it's also important to go back and look at it in the entirety of its context. over the course of the last decade, and it didn't just begin with donald trump. there has been this slow erosion of the acceptance and tolerance that american jews have had in this society. 2016 was a turning point because in the final ad of donald trump's campaign, he flashed the

faces of three jews and described them as globalists who were bleeding the people try, which was a classic antisemitic narrative. then over the course of his campaign, he also, in his presidency, he winked at the white supremacists who praised him but also said incredibly vile things. so he had the effect of expanding what was tolerated, permissible in american discourse, and antisemitism, which had been locked away, shut out of the in tern had the eff of encouraging this rise in hate crimes and other forms of harassment that had really surged in the last couple of years. >> franklin, senator schumer has responded he called former president trump's comments utterly disgusting and a textbook example of the kind of anti-semitism facing jews today.

and he also went on the say nobody who breaks bread with anti-semites like nick fuenes and called white supremacists in charlottesville good people or said disgustingly hitler did good things has any right to lecture about someone's personal and political beliefs. someone would say, listen, donald trump is a big supporter of israel, a big supporter of benjamin netanyahu, he moved the embassy at the request of israel. how do you score that? >> so i mean there's a lot donald trump says and does, and not all of it adds up. and american jews happen to have very divergent opinions about israel. it's just a fact. and chuck schumer is somebody who in addition to giving the speech that he gave, gave another powerful speech on the floor of the senate about the ways in which anti-semitism is

on the rise and comes from both the left and right. he criticized his people on the side in the course of doing that. what trump does in effect is he talks out of both sides of his mouth. on one side of the mouth he says i'm doing all these things for israel and jews must love me, and if they don't love me for all the things i'm doing for israel, they are bad people. and we know in which his campaign and the people around him and the passions he incites ends up treating people who he deems to be bad people. that's the dangerous part. >> franklin, really good to have have you. i encourage everybody to read your piece in the atlantic. coming up paul krugman joins me. don't go anywhere. we're going to talk about the economy. don't go anywhere. we're going to talk about the economy.

a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently. he hits his mark —center stage—and is crushed by a baby grand piano. you're replacing me? customize and save with liberty bibberty. he doesn't even have a mustache. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ you can't leave without cuddles. but, you also can't leave covered in hair. with bounce pet, you can cuddle and brush that hair off. bounce, it's the sheet.

morikawa on 18. he is really boxed in here. -not a good spot. off the comcast business van. into the vending area. oh, not the fries! where's the ball? -anybody see it? oh wait, there it is! -back into play and... aw no, it's in the water. wait a minute... are you kidding me? you got to be kidding me. rolling towards the cup, and it's in the hole! what an impossible shot brought to you by comcast business.

if the election really comes down to the economy, one of the key questions will be are you better off financially today than you were four years ago, which is what makes this poll so interesting. when asked about the economy 35% of michigan voters said it was excellent or good while 60% said it was not so good or bad. but when asked about their own finances the results flipped. 61% said they were in excellent or good shape, and 38% said they were in not in good shape. they were in bad shape.

a 2008 nobel laureate in economics and "the new york times" columnist joins us now to explain. really good to have you. try to help me understand this disconnect. >> okay, so i'm constantly being told you say all these macro economic statistics are great, but people aren't feeling it. what these polls are showing and really confirm is that actually people are feeling it. if you ask people how are you doing, people are actually pretty upbeat. people say i'm in good or excellent financial shape. people say i'm better off than i was five years ago. it's only if you ask them about the economy that they say things are terrible, which says this is not about people's personal experience. of course, you know, everybody is upset about the price of groceries, but the reality is the economy is delivering for people. it's the narrative people have adopted. they believe that it's bad, but

they think the bad things are happening i guess to somebody else. >> that's what it is. i'm fine, but i assume other people are really having a hard time, and that's why i'm going to tell a pollster that it doesn't feel good? >> yeah, of course a lot of people -- these consumer sentiment numbers are hugely affected by bipartisanship. both parties but especially republican. you ask about the economy and their answer is i hate joe bidench the point is these consumer sentiment numbers i don't know what it's going to do politically, but what's actually -- what people are actually perceiving in their lives is consistent with the good numbers that, you know, biden people like to cite, but people somehow don't believe it's true for the nation as a whole. >> i was going to ask you what it's going to mean politically, and i know you don't have a crystal ball, but do you think it's going to be because it's such a partisan issue or becomes such a partisan issue when

people are asked it, do you think it's going to have a big effect on november? is it still it's the economy, stupid? >> my guess is not. my guess is because what people say in the economy and even people see in the economy it's so partisan, it's not going to move a lot of people. the things going to drive people are probably going to be socioeconomic issues. this may be in the end more about the election of roe v. wade than about inflation. >> or as "the washington post" puts it, it's about the culture wars, stupid. let me ask you what direction do you think the economy is going in? where are we likely to be come late summer or early fall? >> okay, there's enough noise in the data you can tell me any story you like, but it really does look like to me inflation is still falling. there were some noisy numbers, but inflation is still falling, not a hint of recession in the data. this is -- i kind of hate the

phrase, but this is a goldilocks economy, it's a miracle. considering what we thought was going to happen, the predictions for recession, claiming we were going to need massive unemployment to get inflation down, but what we actually have as people say is immaculate disinflation. inflation down, unemployment still near a 50-year low. it -- i was a big -- i didn't buy the pessimism, but i'm shocked at how well things have gone. >> immaculate disinflation is a great term. but when you say it in such positive terms and you make it sound like that, it sounds too good to be true, paul. >> well, except we have a story. and believe it or not the white house was telling the story right at the beginning of inflation and turns out to have been right, although it took longer, which is most of what we saw was disruptions in the wake of the pandemic. we just got out of an economy discombobulated by all the toilet paper shortages and

things like that. and those disruptions lasted for a long time, but eventually we adapted. we've got very resilient economy, creative business people, flexible work, and we adapted. that's what brought inflation down with really hardly any economic pain. >> paul krugman, it's really, really great to have you. thank you so much. an interesting disconnect but one i think you've explained well. it's more about partisanship, the culture wars. thank you so much for being here. appreciate your time. >> thanks for having me on. >> and that's going to do it for me today. "deadline white house" starts right now. hi, everyone. it is 4:00 in new york. i'm ayman mohyeldin in for nicolle wallace. as we come on the air we're following growing questions about the federal judge seeing one